Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

If we do that, they should do the same, but they don't, and I'm only referring to elementary schools. Schools teaching secondary level education and a bove don't normally have any religious signs. Yet they complain about us when they have more than just a few signs in their own country and prevent us from public practice. We're already too tolerant as it is. Doesn't that make them hypocritical in a sense?

They don't live in those countries nor do they have any say in policies there. Now if they insisted that the crosses come down and muslim religious symbols go up you might have a point. However, just by insisting the crosses come down, no they are not being hypocritical.

They don't live in those countries nor do they have any say in policies there. Now if they insisted that the crosses come down and muslim religious symbols go up you might have a point. However, just by insisting the crosses come down, no they are not being hypocritical.

Yes, we don't have a say in their country so we can't complain for the fact that we can't practice publicly or that they expose us to all their religious signs there. That being said, what gives them the right to complain?

Multiculturialism in Europe has failed. Assimilation has failed. Immigration has failed. Secularism may soon too fail.

Sit back, sip some tea and enjoy the slow demographic/religoius change across Western Europe.

As Mohammed rises up the charts of most popular boy's name as it already doing in England you will all slowly start to wonder where seperation of church and state went. Many muslims may be secular, yet those who aren't don't comprise a minute quantity like apologists would like you to believe. Yes, those Christian nutjobs may still be around (gotta spread the love to appease the apologists).

Alarmist? Perhaps... Maybe this cultural shift is not necessarily a bad thing. Only time will tell.

Europe doesn't have a choice when it comes to immigration. The "traditional" Europeans are not having enough babies. Or do you want to emulate Japan? There may be 2 million foreigners over there, but it's out of a total population of 120++ million.

Multiculturialism in Europe has failed. Assimilation has failed. Immigration has failed. Secularism may soon too fail.

Sit back, sip some tea and enjoy the slow demographic/religoius change across Western Europe.

As Mohammed rises up the charts of most popular boy's name as it already doing in England you will all slowly start to wonder where seperation of church and state went. Many muslims may be secular, yet those who aren't don't comprise a minute quantity like apologists would like you to believe. Yes, those Christian nutjobs may still be around (gotta spread the love to appease the apologists).

Alarmist? Perhaps... Maybe this cultural shift is not necessarily a bad thing. Only time will tell.

Note : Mohammed is part of every Muslim boy's name, just like every Muslim girl's name have a Bte in it. Unless the parent opts to have a different name structure due to one of the parents being another religion, or a media leaves it out completely, that part is always existent.

This is like the ancient times where Saracens and Christians battled each other instead of making advancement in science and literature. Just that things get deadlier and dumber.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

The commission plans to unveil the final report in early January on a roadmap to the ultimate goal of a world free of nuclear weapons, which was proposed by U.S. President Barack Obama in April in Prague.

In a draft report titled ''Eliminating Nuclear Threats: A Practical Agenda for Global Policymakers,'' which was obtained by Kyodo News, the panel ambitiously targeted reducing the number of existing nuclear warheads in the world from more than 20,000 to 1,000 or fewer by 2025 and making every nuclear state commit to the no-first-use doctrine by that year. The initial target for an adoption of the doctrine was 2010 in earlier draft.

The doctrine is a pledge by a nuclear power not to use nuclear weapons unless it or its allies come under nuclear attack.

Survivors of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima in 1945 and their supporters are asking the commission to stipulate in the report a clear deadline for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Finally, the elimination of nuclear weapons is becoming close to a reality. Hopefully, all the nuclear nations will actually pledge to follow the doctrine of both reducing the number of nuclear warheads and also not to use unless they get hit by nukes first.

Finally, the elimination of nuclear weapons is becoming close to a reality. Hopefully, all the nuclear nations will actually pledge to follow the doctrine of both reducing the number of nuclear warheads and also not to use unless they get hit by nukes first.

I cringe at the use of the word "elimination", it is kind of fairytale ... minimization and constant monitoring perhaps. The technology exists, period. It won't be a "nation" that uses the next one but a rogue group.

It is the first time that a U.S. administration official has signaled that Washington would mull the idea of making adjustments to the location of the new facility that would take over the heliport functions of the U.S. Marines Corps' Futemma Air Station in Okinawa.

This seems like a positive development as that it indicates the United States actually values mutual trust and strong bilateral ties but only problem is that 50 metres is like nothing at all when it comes to noisy fighter jets. Generally, this isn't much of a negotiation. I get the feeling that the United States claim to put thoughts into the feelings of the Okinawans, even though they don't plan on doing anything at all, especially resolving the matters of noisy military drills that are causing so many local individuals from sufferering loss of sleep. How sad...

----

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

I cringe at the use of the word "elimination", it is kind of fairytale ... minimization and constant monitoring perhaps. The technology exists, period. It won't be a "nation" that uses the next one but a rogue group.

Only problem is that the term "rogue group" or "rogue states" can be applied to any nation that uses nukes after signing the doctrine meaning that it is pretty much the same thing except a different jargon. Nonetheless, I do agree that the elimination of nuclear weapons is rather unrealistic but it is a good goal for the world to pursue as that there is absolutely no positive beneifts of possessing or developing nuclear weapons.

... Nonetheless, I do agree that the elimination of nuclear weapons is rather unrealistic but it is a good goal for the world to pursue as that there is absolutely no positive beneifts of possessing or developing nuclear weapons.

I concur... I spent some time in the '80s Cold War actually assessing and modeling nuclear weapon effects as part of designing B-52 systems training simulators and other DoD projects (my relatives often joked I'd become a "Man in Black"...).

It was quickly obvious that the entire concept of "nuclear war" or "nuclear exchange" was a fantasy in cognitive dissonance. The idea it was a "war" rather than a collective murder-suicide, at least. All us engineers would gather periodically to watch Dr. Strangelove and play "spot the real life character we'd met".

I don't think the elimination of nuclear weaponry's a pipe dream, just a long term one. I mean, you never know, we may find bigger and better bombs.

It pretty much is if we ever want to go into space. To get from point A to point B over interplanetary distances in a reasonable amount of time, you need engines with power outputs on the scale of nuclear weapons to do it. Let's not forget that with current technology an orion drive is the most likely method for that and it used actual bombs for propulsion.

Remember the Orion project? After this mandate kicks in, we FINALLY have enough resources to get that space program going.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ascaloth

[wry]But but but we must keep some at least in stock! Otherwise what else would we shoot or plant incoming killer comets with?![/wry]

I'll go get my coat now....

I think the only risky things that would actually hit us are gigantic alien rubber ducks from outer space.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

All nations that have nukes will keep them to some degree, I'm sure. Also, they are mankind's greatest raw power. Why shouldn't we keep some in case the day comes that we absolutely have to blow something really big up?

All nations that have nukes will keep them to some degree, I'm sure. Also, they are mankind's greatest raw power. Why shouldn't we keep some in case the day comes that we absolutely have to blow something really big up?

A suicide bomber killed five senior commanders of the powerful Revolutionary Guard and at least 37 others Sunday near the Pakistani border in the heartland of a potentially escalating Sunni insurgency.